Comments for Meta Interchangehttps://galencharlton.com/blog
Libraries, computing, metadata, and moreThu, 02 Nov 2017 15:32:48 +0000hourly1https://wordpress.org/?v=4.9.1Comment on Scaling the annual Code4Lib conference by rantihttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2017/10/scaling-the-annual-code4lib-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-198671
Thu, 02 Nov 2017 15:32:48 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1469#comment-198671Thank you for the break down of the costs, Galen. I really appreciate it.
]]>Comment on Scaling the annual Code4Lib conference by Galen Charltonhttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2017/10/scaling-the-annual-code4lib-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-198670
Thu, 02 Nov 2017 12:28:37 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1469#comment-198670I should be able to get the 2017 numbers up in some form in the next day or two for the sake of discussion, but speaking generally, there’s less that can be trimmed than one might think.

The venue has to fit 400+ people, and unless Code4Lib stops being a single track conference, all in the same room. That room has have enough power outlets for 400+ laptops and/or tablets or be able to daisy-chain a bunch of power strips. It has to have (or support) an adequate sound system and projectors.

As far as catering goes: you don’t necessarily need food, but I can’t imagine a Code4Lib without caffeine on hand. On the other hand, a lot of venues structure their services to encourage catering, and in some cases it can be cheaper to feed people lunch rather than directly pay for room rentals. If you don’t provide meals, then you need to make sure that people will be able to get out to lunch and back in a reasonable amount of time.

Of course, some libraries, particularly academic ones, have access on-campus conference centers. However, while the campus might provide a discount… those conference centers are revenue centers for their universities, so you can’t can’t count on much of a discount.

All of that said, the two cities chosen for 2017 and 2018, Los Angeles and D.C., are probably outliers in terms of the cost of hosting conventions. Other cities would like be cheaper… but you can’t get too far away from a major airport or some of the savings for attendees will be eaten up by increased transportation costs.

As far as things that can be cut? There’s a lot that modern Code4Lib conferences do that don’t significantly affect the bottom line. Diversity scholarships are funded purely through donations, and we don’t have much trouble getting people and institutions willing to fund them. The cost of online transcription is less than $2,000 and significantly increases access; childcare runs $2,000-$3,500 and also increases access.

The t-shirts cost around $5,000 and of course aren’t strictly necessary, but if we forgo them, we’d need to think of other ways to have sponsors display their logos.

The reception is another matter. That cost about $21,000 in 2017, and cutting it could have reduced registration fees by about $50. However, my view that we can forgo the reception is not commonly shared; and there is a case to be made that it has sufficient community-building value to be worth it. And of course, for 2018 the reception is to be held at the Library of Congress, which is inherently going to be a draw for a lot of folks. (By the way, making the reception be a separately-ticketed event is a possibility, but not always; for example, the 2018 conference explicitly cannot directly sell tickets for a reception at LC.)

Another big chunk comes from the fees and travel reimbursements paid to CONCENTRA. We don’t necessarily have to use a professional event manager… but I submit that it would be foolish for a potential host to forgo that unless they are able to commit a significant chunk of time from an in-house meeting planner for at least nine months.

So, can Code4Lib’s budget be trimmed back? Totally, especially if the community wants to have a low registration fees be one of the things the conference optimizes for. But it would mean some changes to the structure of the event, and ultimately, the cost of potential venues is not something that can be handwaved away.

]]>Comment on Scaling the annual Code4Lib conference by rantihttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2017/10/scaling-the-annual-code4lib-conference/comment-page-1/#comment-198669
Wed, 01 Nov 2017 23:13:32 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1469#comment-198669That code4lib conference now needs around quarter million dollars is mind boggling, to be honest. The thing is, I never saw the itemized report about the cost. Is there somewhere one can look at? Also, what are the items that we can do without? Is it even possible to find one?
]]>Comment on What makes an anti-librarian? by Jonathan Rochkindhttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2017/06/what-makes-an-anti-librarian/comment-page-1/#comment-198659
Sun, 18 Jun 2017 20:26:50 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1439#comment-198659+1
]]>Comment on What makes an anti-librarian? by Marie Ascherhttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2017/06/what-makes-an-anti-librarian/comment-page-1/#comment-198658
Fri, 16 Jun 2017 18:35:48 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1439#comment-198658I suppose it is his belief that OA means the end of libraries. If so, he has a very narrow view of what libraries are.
]]>Comment on What makes an anti-librarian? by Reginahttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2017/06/what-makes-an-anti-librarian/comment-page-1/#comment-198657
Fri, 16 Jun 2017 02:43:09 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1439#comment-198657I agree with Rachel Walden, and would add that misguided Academic Deans, Provosts, CFOs, etc., pose more of a threat than predatory publishers.
]]>Comment on ALA and recognizing situations for what they are by Gracie P.https://galencharlton.com/blog/2016/12/ala-and-recognizing-situations-for-what-they-are/comment-page-1/#comment-198645
Mon, 19 Dec 2016 01:04:17 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1353#comment-198645Thank you for writing about this with the nuance that the situation merits. It is extremely disturbing to read on one blog ALA employees being alluded to as slave traders, called fascist colluders, and warned they will “spit in your face” if given a chance. Acknowledging that there are not just good but excellent people (and librarians), even some role models, in the organization, is a welcome reminder. Let’s leave the hateful vitriol to the Donald Trumps of this world. It has no place in the library world.
]]>Comment on How to build an evil library catalog by Galen Charltonhttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2016/09/how-to-build-an-evil-library-catalog/comment-page-1/#comment-198638
Wed, 21 Sep 2016 23:24:26 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1311#comment-198638Indeed, ranking by popularity can be ethically tricky even without misrepresenting what it’s doing by randomly generating the rating. As you point out, basing it on bestseller lists and marketing data would allow the results to be gamed, either directly or indirectly. Even if the library only uses endogenous metrics such as circulation frequency, privileging the “usual suspects” can be problematic.

Much depends on the user’s purpose for sorting by popularity. Some folks may simply want to keep up with the zeitgeist and read what others are reading — and so be it. However, users who are using popularity as an indicator of quality can easily be misled. And of course, if popularity ranking actually does influence what patrons choose to read [citation needed?], positive feedback loops could narrow a community’s reading, bury books by minority authors, and make collection development policies less equitable.

I agree that there is a place for randomization when highlighting books in the catalog, but such displays should clearly indicate what’s going on.

]]>Comment on How to build an evil library catalog by Davehttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2016/09/how-to-build-an-evil-library-catalog/comment-page-1/#comment-198637
Wed, 21 Sep 2016 16:08:33 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1311#comment-198637I’m sure that some ethical (or at least ‘not-unethical’) mischief can be achieved.

I’m not convinced even of how ethical the popularity rankings options are in search results. Sure, it’s often up to a user to choose to sort in that way, but what about those titles displayed on the home page because they’re popular? In many cases those books will already be unethically at the top of the lists through dodgy practice of popular book lists and aggressive marketing. For a library to offer a ‘most popular’ is aggravating this problem.

I’d be all up for introducing some randomly generated results – to draw particular attention to books that aren’t checked out so often and experiment to see how that affects issues/whatever.

]]>Comment on The blossoming of the Mellie-cat by ArleneShttps://galencharlton.com/blog/2016/08/the-blossoming-of-the-mellie-cat/comment-page-1/#comment-198632
Thu, 01 Sep 2016 00:05:52 +0000https://galencharlton.com/blog/?p=1298#comment-198632It’s all about context, isn’t it? Mellie with Zorra is not the same as Mellie feme sole. Glad she’s turning into such a cool kitty. The jury is still out on Lia sans Dief. She’s stopped being quite so needy but she is become more cat-like.
]]>